Development Partner Profile

Summary

This development partner profile showcases different dimensions of performance and the distribution of development finance of the International Monetary Fund. The information
below was compiled from two sources: AidData's 2014 Reform Efforts Survey
and 2004-2013 Core Database. The 2014 Reform Efforts
Survey asked public, private, and civil society leaders in 126 low- and middle-income countries questions about the most pressing problems
they face, their top policy priorities, and how aid agencies can partner with them most effectively. Leaders evaluated the degree to which
the International Monetary Fund's influenced the policy agenda (n=999),
provided useful advice (n=642), and how helpful this development partner was in implementation
(n=437). The 2004-2013 Core Database represents the most comprehensive dataset tracking international
development finance.

Where does the International Monetary Fund's Development Finance go?

Top Partner Countries(in millions USD by % of development finance)

Mexico (23%, 44556.9)

Poland (16%, 31554.5)

Greece (9%, 18459.9)

Portugal (8%, 15121.7)

Ukraine (7%, 14631.3)

Ireland (7%, 13594.3)

Romania (5%, 10359.7)

Colombia (5%, 9399.7)

Hungary (4%, 6993.4)

Turkey (3%, 5483.7)

Source: AidData's 2004-2013 Core Database

Distribution of the International Monetary Fund's Development Finance, 2004-2013(millions of USD)

Source: AidData's 2004-2013 Core Database

In which countries is the International Monetary Fund performing the best?

0 = not at all influential5 = extremely influential

1 = not at all useful5 = extremely useful

* The usefulness of advice scale ranged from 1 to 5.

0 = not at all helpful5 = extremely helpful

Source: AidData's 2014 Reform Efforts Survey, Q14, Q21, Q25

How do in-country stakeholders perceive the International Monetary Fund's performance?

3.1

Survey respondents gave an average score of 3.1 to
the International Monetary Fund's agenda-setting influence, 1.1 above the average country.

3.6

Survey respondents gave a score of 3.6 to
the International Monetary Fund's usefulness of advice.

*The usefulness of advice scale ranged from 1 to 5.

3.8

Survey respondents gave a score of 3.8 to
the International Monetary Fund's helpfulness in policy reform implementation.

Source: AidData's 2014 Reform Efforts Survey, Q14, Q21, Q25

The International Monetary Fund's Useful Advice, Amount of Development Finance, and Influence by Policy Area